Is Iran Really a Threat to the United States? A Debate.
On this episode of 'The Opinions,' the director of the editorial board David Leonhardt moderates a discussion between the Opinion columnist Bret Stephens, who applauds U.S. military action on Iran, and Rosemary Kelanic, a director of the Middle East program at Defense Priorities, who warns the United States against striking Iran.
Below is a transcript of an episode of 'The Opinions.' We recommend listening to it in its original form for the full effect. You can do so using the player above or on the NYT Audio app, Apple, Spotify, Amazon Music, YouTube, iHeartRadio or wherever you get your podcasts.
The transcript has been lightly edited for length and clarity.
David Leonhardt: I'm David Leonhardt, the editorial director of The New York Times editorial board. Every week I'm having conversations to shape the board's opinions. This week we want to make sense of the war in Iran. Have Israel and the United States achieved their goals? Does Iran still have a nuclear program? And is the cease-fire real?
To answer these questions, I've invited two guests with very different points of view. One is my colleague, the columnist Bret Stephens, who has applauded President Trump's strikes in Iran. Bret, welcome.
Bret Stephens: Good to see you, David.
The other is Rosemary Kelanic, the director of the Middle East program at Defense Priorities, a think tank. Rosemary warned against the U.S. getting involved before Trump bombed Iran.
Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
9 minutes ago
- USA Today
NATO commits to higher spending sought by Trump and mutual defense
While Trump got what he wanted at the brief NATO summit, his allies will be relieved he committed to the fundamental principle of collective defense. THE HAGUE, June 25 (Reuters) - NATO leaders on June 25 backed the big increase in defense spending that President Donald Trump had demanded, and restated their commitment to defend each other from attack. While Trump got what he wanted at the brief summit, tailor-made for him, his NATO allies will be relieved that he committed to the fundamental principle of collective defense after less clear-cut language on June 24. In a five-point statement, NATO endorsed a higher defence spending goal of 5% of GDP by 2035 - a response not only to Trump but also to Europeans' fears that Russia poses a growing threat to their security following the 2022 invasion of Ukraine. More: Israel-Iran ceasefire seems to hold as Trump lands in Europe for NATO summit The 32 allies' brief communique added: "We reaffirm our ironclad commitment to collective defense as enshrined in Article 5 of the Washington Treaty – that an attack on one is an attack on all." Asked to clarify his own stance on Article 5, Trump said: "I stand with it. That's why I'm here. If I didn't stand with it, I wouldn't be here." Macron brings up trade war at NATO summit Trump had long demanded in no uncertain terms that for other countries step up their spending on defense to reduce NATO's heavy reliance on the U.S. Despite an appearance of general agreement, French President Emmanuel Macron raised the issue of the steep import tariffs threatened by Trump, and the damage they may do to transatlantic trade, as a barrier to increased defense spending. More: Can Trump pull off peace plans, trade deals at the G7? What to know about the summit "You cannot come to us as allies and ask that we spend more, tell us we will spend more at NATO - and do a trade war. It's an aberration," he told reporters. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, who hosted the summit in his home city of The Hague, said NATO would emerge as a 'stronger, fairer and more lethal' alliance. He had earlier acknowledged that it was not easy for European countries and Canada to find the extra money, but said it was vital to do so. "There is absolute conviction with my colleagues at the table that, given this threat from the Russians, given the international security situation, there is no alternative," the former Dutch prime minister told reporters in his home city of The Hague. The new spending target - to be achieved over the next 10 years - is a jump worth hundreds of billions of dollars a year from the current goal of 2% of GDP, although it will be measured differently. Countries would spend 3.5% of GDP on core defence - such as troops and weapons - and 1.5% on broader defence-related measures such as cyber security, protecting pipelines and adapting roads and bridges to handle heavy military vehicles. All NATO members have backed a statement enshrining the target, although Spain declared it does not need to meet the goal and can meet its commitments by spending much less. More: Trump says US strike impaired Iran's nukes. What does Pentagon say? Live updates Rutte disputes that but accepted a diplomatic fudge with Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez as part of his efforts to give Trump a diplomatic victory and make the summit go smoothly. Spain said on June 25 that it did not expect its stance to have any repercussions. Trump meets Zelenskyy after summit Rutte kept the summit and its final statement short and focused on the spending pledge to try to avert any friction with Trump. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy had to settle for attending the pre-summit June 24 dinner rather than the main meeting on June 25, although he met Trump separately after the conference ended. The Kremlin on June 24 accused NATO of being on a path of rampant militarization and portraying Russia as a "fiend of hell" in order to justify its big increase in defense spending.
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Tucker Carlson takes on Fox News
For years, Tucker Carlson made a name for himself on cable television and built a loyal following through attacks on Democrats, rival network news hosts, and other leading enemies of the right. Now the conservative political podcaster and social media personality is turning his fire on the company that helped build him up — and then terminated him three years ago after he served as a staple of its prime-time lineup: Fox News. Carlson, who opposed U.S. intervention in the Israeli-Iran war, has ripped Fox over its coverage of the conflict. 'The Murdochs really hate Trump,' Carlson said during a recent episode of his online commentary and interview show. 'I got fired in April of 2023. In May of 2023, they asked me to run for president against Trump and said they would back me.' His battle with his former employer underscores the MAGA fight for the president's ear. Anti-war MAGA figures like Carlson are worried that Fox News, which has been reliably supportive of calls to attack Iran, has had too much influence on President Trump, who last Saturday ordered strikes on three Iranian nuclear plans. Trump is known to watch media coverage of his decisionmaking as president closely and in real time, placing particular stake in how things 'play' on Fox, those around him say. The New York Times reported several top advisers to the president are irritated Carlson is no longer at Fox, fearing Trump was not hearing enough of a more isolationist argument when deciding whether to attack Iran's nuclear facilities. Carlson has made this argument explicit, saying Fox is engaging in pro-war 'propaganda' as part of an effort to 'scare old people' and benefit the 'warmongers' running the network. As Carlson hosted a conversation with Steve Bannon, a former top White House aide who also is known for taking shots at the Murdoch family, Carlson remarked it 'feels like Fox is playing a central role in the pro-war push.' 'They're doing the thing they always do,' he said. 'Turning up the propaganda hose to full blast and just knock elderly Fox viewers off their feet and make them submit to a new war.' Mark Levin, a weekend Fox News host and conservative talk radio firebrand, has been a target of Carlson's and has often pushed back. Levin, who often raises his voice and shakes as he speaks with passionate bombast, has advocated for more military action against Iran and called Carlson out by name over his previous positions on the Middle East when he worked as a host on the more liberal CNN and MSNBC. 'His preposterously hysterical warnings about what would happen if the president acted militarily against Iran's nuclear sites were illustrative of his unhinged bravado,' Levin wrote on social media of his former fellow Fox host. 'He's very proud of his depraved insanity.' Levin then called Carlson 'Qatarlson,' a play on Qatar, an ally of Iran. 'Qatarlson has been a liberal, a libertarian, an actual neo-con, a conservative, and today just a simple reprobate who has much in common with Bernie Sanders and Rashida Tlaib,' Levin said. Fox News did not comment on criticisms from Carlson, Bannon and others in recent days, though the network did send a press release on Tuesday reporting its industry-leading ratings during the U.S. military strike on Iran. Carlson has turned some of his criticism on Trump himself, surprising many in media and political circles when he blasted the president as 'complicit' in the escalating violence in the Middle East. Those comments earned the commentator a rare rebuke from the president, who called him 'kooky' in a social media post last week. Later, Trump told reporters he had spoken to Carlson by phone and the two had reconciled. 'DJT and Tucker are good,' one source with knowledge of the dynamic told The Hill this week. 'And this thing getting wrapped up so quickly basically stopped a major civil war on the right.' But the war between Carlson and Fox appears far from over. 'All of this is deranged,' Carlson said again this week after playing for his online audience clips from Fox hosts and guests warning about the dangers of Iran obtaining nuclear weapons and advocating for regime change in Tehran. 'These are all people who hate Trump,' he said of GOP Sens. Lindsey Graham (S.C.), Ted Cruz (Texas) and others featured in the montage, all of whom see themselves as allies of the president. Carlson earned a flurry of headlines and even some rare praise from liberals last week for an interview he conducted with Cruz days earlier questioning the lawmaker on the merits of U.S. involvement in the Middle East and quizzing him on basic facts about Iran. The two battled when Cruz — who has made regular appearances on Fox in recent weeks to advocate for a stronger U.S. posture toward Iran, primarily on pundit Sean Hannity's prime-time program — acknowledged he did not know the population of Iran. Some observers say Carlson is also playing a game to his own benefit. 'Tucker Carlson is doing what he does best, which is playing the role of Tucker Carlson,' said Peter Loge, a professor of politics and communications at George Washington University. 'If he isn't outraged or shouting at people in power, he isn't doing his job. Biting hands is how Tucker Carlson pays the bills.' If Fox News's coverage leans pro-Trump and approves of his decision to launch strikes at Iran, that is also a conscious choice by the network, one GOP political operative said. 'This is pretty made for TV, all of it. It's a deliberate strategy by Fox to keep people watching,' the Republican political operative said. This source also said Trump will continue to play to both sides. 'Trump recognizes the following Tucker has but he also knows he needs Fox. He's one for flattery, so he's going to weigh both sides of it, but we know he's ultimately going to do what he sees fit,' the operative said. Updated: 8:02 a.m. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Candace Owens says she's 'embarrassed' she supported Trump
Conservative commentator Candace Owens said Tuesday she's 'embarrassed' after campaigning for President Trump during the 2024 presidential election cycle. 'He's been a chronic disappointment. And I feel embarrassed that I told people to go vote for him because this wasn't going to happen, and it is happening,' Owens said during an appearance on Piers Morgan Uncensored. Owens was a staunch supporter of Trump during his first White House bid and spoke highly of the leader after his exit from the Oval. However, she's criticized his recent decision to engage in the Israel-Iran conflict. Over the weekend, B2 bombers from the United States struck three of Iran's nuclear facilities, furthering Israel's effort to weaken the country's weapon development. 'This was not Trump's decision; it was Bibi Netanyahu's decision. And that is the reason that he did it. We're very aware that Israel is dictating our foreign policy, and we'd now like that to stop,' Owens told Morgan. Owens said there was 'no imminent threat' to the U.S. slamming Trump's Sunday strikes, while the Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, and others have alleged that Iran was nowhere near obtaining nuclear weapon capability, which the president adamantly denied. 'I don't care what she said. I think they were very close to having one,' Trump told reporters on Air Force One on Tuesday. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
